It's no definitive masterpiece but it's damn close.

everything you have heard about this movie is true.

A Major Disappointment

A different way of telling a story

NIGHT OF TERROR is an early entry in the creaky 'old dark house' genre which was all the rage in the 1930s. It has all of the right ingredients in pretty much the right order, and at just an hour in length it doesn't drag on too much. A familial home is the setting for a night of murders and mysterious disappearances as the police struggle to investigate. You get mad scientists, a maniac killer prowling the countryside and knifing his victims, a mystic, comedy relief from a frightened black servant, a shifty servant, secret passages, plotting, hidden motives, and gloomy old locales. Bela Lugosi headlines the production, riding high on the big success of DRACULA, and is fantastically creepy. The rest is dated but nonetheless a lot of fun.

This Columbia "B" thriller features many of the typical 'old dark house' trappings (which proliferated throughout the late 20s up till the mid-30s) and is therefore quite predictable; still, the denouement is rather effective – and it's all capped by an amusing (if hammy) interpolation by the maniac killer of the main narrative, which sees him coming back to life to warn cinema patrons not to reveal the twist ending! A mere two years after his runaway success with Dracula (1931), the film already sees Bela Lugosi reduced to playing thankless roles because, even though he receives sole above-the-title billing here, the horror icon's presence constitutes a red herring and nothing more (the way he's made to intimidate his spiritualist wife during a séance proves especially pointless) and is further hindered by the unflattering Hindu attire (turban, gypsy earrings) he is saddled with throughout. Frankly, after having seen several films of Lugosi's (and with a handful more coming up), I still can't make up my mind whether his unique (i.e. sluggish and heavily-accented) delivery of lines is an asset or a liability! To get back to the 'monster' of the film, again, his involvement results to be irrelevant to the central mystery (with an inheritance at stake, members of a wealthy family are getting bumped off one by one): familiar heavy-set character actor Edwin Maxwell is credited with playing the role, but he was unrecognizable behind the make-up. Lovely Sally Blane (who happens to be Loretta Young's sister!) and Wallace Ford (insufferable as the fast-talking reporter hero, a role he virtually reprised in a later Lugosi cheapie – THE APE MAN [1943]) provide the obligatory romantic interest; another requisite – and equally resistible – is the politically incorrect comedy relief supplied by the household's 'scaredy cat' black chauffeur. Given a somewhat harsh BOMB rating by Leonard Maltin, I knew not to expect much from the film – but, ultimately, it's a harmless way to kill 60 minutes or so…and, in any case, the script does come up with a handful of undeniably hilarious lines: when a delegation of scientists arrives at the mansion to assist to a dangerous experiment, the chauffeur remarks that they look like undertakers – later, when he sees these same men transport a coffin in which his current master is about to be buried alive, he observes that he had been right all along!; driven as much by jealousy as the promise of a scoop, Ford bursts into the household to see Blane – noticing four other hats in the parlor (belonging to the illustrious guests), he asks her whether she had been entertaining the Marx Bros.; when the bodies start piling up and the police is called on the scene, Ford offers his help but is told off by the investigating officer – however, on asking for the generalities of all the persons in the room, the response of one of the scientists comes in the form of an unpronounceable foreign name and, so, the befuddled cop gladly relinquishes the writing duties to the newspaperman!; still, my favorite bit is when a hand-cuffed Lugosi asks the detective guarding him if he can smoke, and the latter – with quite unwarranted hostility – snaps back "I don't care if you burn!"

If I were going to list the ten best films Bela Lugosi appeared in, this would be one of them. This film has everything, including sliding panels, secret tunnels, mysterious visitors, sudden and horrifying killings, a seance where a murder occurs, bizarre characters, bizarre behavior such as the clipping of newspapers on the bodies of victims, and a rampaging misanthrope called The Maniac with a distorted, hair-raising face that would frighten the proverbial "boogieman". The bizarre ending in which the true murderer is revealed is a delight. (I won't reveal it here). Also the last scene in which The Maniac comes back to life is classic.10 out of 10.Dan Basinger

As usual, i must disagree with the other reviewer. All that cliche-ic stuff (secret panels, the "maniac", seances, etc) is what makes this film a GREAT "Old House" film! Granted, Lugosi is wasted in this role, but the entire film builds up a creepy, sinister "atmosphere".Both Maltin and the other reviewer dismiss the end of the film, where the maniac speaks to the audience but, I first saw this when I was about 6 years old, and it scared the bejesus out of me for several nights! Don't analyzse this film....just WATCH it....and ENJOY! Norm